There was a lightbulb for me a bit ago, talking to S John Ross.
For some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input — things that affect the character, but that aren’t described in a way that can be translated as things the character directly perceives.
This includes outcomes from mechanics that fall into “story” categories, instead of physical or task-related results.
Fate points, Compels, and Concessions are all things that the player needs to manage — even possible negotiate — that are completely outside the scope of what the characters can know. The characters get jerked around because of things that are part of building the story, but aren’t exactly diegetic to the story. They’re like when the director of a play of movie says “ok, for this next scene we’re going to try...”
Contrast spells, hit points, armor class — while the numbers might not be apparent to a character, a character knows specifically how injures they are, what armor they’re wearing, and how magic is implemented in that setting.
Jesse Cox What I mean is your sentence is "For some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input". I understand what directorial input is, but are you trying to say "For some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input... is bad"? I presume so, but I want to make sure.
For some people, taking directorial input completely blows up their experience of gaming — pulls them out of immersion, screws with their sense of achievement, invades their private character headspace.
No worries, I do it all the time... in particular if I go back to rewrite part of a post. Of course /I/ know exactly what I meant, why doesn't everyone else? :)
If I remember correctly, the fiction first aspect of Apocalypse World was inspired by Vincent Baker describing one of the valuable things that OSR systems brought to the table. (Tagged so he can correct me if I'm wrong.)
William Nichols Yes I read that. The attitude for things like this tends to be something like, "Narrate your character's actions however you like, but don't contradict the rules/rulings."
Just poking in to clarify: I am not an OSR person in any way. While it's cool that Jesse Cox might have any kind of relevant insight (about anything, ever) from talking with me, I just, for the record, find the OSR alien to my gaming interests (there are some nice folks in the OSR, I just don't want to game with them). Of course, I feel the same way about storygamers, D&D players, and pretty much everyone else. =) From the way Jesse phrased it, it made me sound OSR, and I'm about as far as conceptually possible from that.
William Nichols I've got around 100 RPGs I consider my favorites, around 200 I'm cool with, and around 500 I'm sufficiently familiar with to maybe run if I have a couple hours advance warning. So, it's a big ol' list =) If you mean most recently: Call of Cthulhu, Risus, Paranoia and Fly From Evil [in playtest] in the past few months. Not enough, though. Need more gamins' =(
(Edit:) Those lists stack like matryoshka, so the big-ol list is in the neighborhood of 500, total, not 500+200+100.
Oh yes.
ReplyDeleteThe osr can get weird about that...
ReplyDeleteThere was a lightbulb for me a bit ago, talking to S John Ross.
ReplyDeleteFor some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input — things that affect the character, but that aren’t described in a way that can be translated as things the character directly perceives.
This includes outcomes from mechanics that fall into “story” categories, instead of physical or task-related results.
Jesse, I feel like there is part of that missing.The idea of them taking direction is... What? :)
ReplyDeleteThe simplest examples are from Fate.
ReplyDeleteFate points, Compels, and Concessions are all things that the player needs to manage — even possible negotiate — that are completely outside the scope of what the characters can know. The characters get jerked around because of things that are part of building the story, but aren’t exactly diegetic to the story. They’re like when the director of a play of movie says “ok, for this next scene we’re going to try...”
Contrast spells, hit points, armor class — while the numbers might not be apparent to a character, a character knows specifically how injures they are, what armor they’re wearing, and how magic is implemented in that setting.
Jesse Cox What I mean is your sentence is "For some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input". I understand what directorial input is, but are you trying to say
ReplyDelete"For some of these people, the idea of taking what I think of as directorial input... is bad"? I presume so, but I want to make sure.
Oh, man. I fail at sentence structure.
ReplyDeleteFor some people, taking directorial input completely blows up their experience of gaming — pulls them out of immersion, screws with their sense of achievement, invades their private character headspace.
Yes. Bad bad.
No worries, I do it all the time... in particular if I go back to rewrite part of a post. Of course /I/ know exactly what I meant, why doesn't everyone else? :)
ReplyDeleteIf I remember correctly, the fiction first aspect of Apocalypse World was inspired by Vincent Baker describing one of the valuable things that OSR systems brought to the table. (Tagged so he can correct me if I'm wrong.)
ReplyDeleteI think that there are plenty of us in OSR circles who are quite happy to discuss fiction first mechanics as they apply to OSR.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think that "rulings, not rules" and "fiction first" are pretty compatible.
(remember also that most OSR gamers also play non-OSR games )
ReplyDeleteOf course, Brian Ashford! But the conversation is really interesting to me.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you saw this one. It was something like "Buffs should be visible. Not like Eagle's Splendor (or whatever. The spells that buff Charisma in 3e)"
And then a bunch of talk never quite saying: Fiction First!
So, interesting to me!
William Nichols Yes I read that. The attitude for things like this tends to be something like, "Narrate your character's actions however you like, but don't contradict the rules/rulings."
ReplyDeleteHow does that mesh with "Fiction First"?
Oh! I saw the thread you’re talking about William Nichols!
ReplyDeleteI interpreted it as being about buffs with concrete details instead of abstract effects.
Just poking in to clarify: I am not an OSR person in any way. While it's cool that Jesse Cox might have any kind of relevant insight (about anything, ever) from talking with me, I just, for the record, find the OSR alien to my gaming interests (there are some nice folks in the OSR, I just don't want to game with them). Of course, I feel the same way about storygamers, D&D players, and pretty much everyone else. =) From the way Jesse phrased it, it made me sound OSR, and I'm about as far as conceptually possible from that.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you play, S. John Ross ?
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols I've got around 100 RPGs I consider my favorites, around 200 I'm cool with, and around 500 I'm sufficiently familiar with to maybe run if I have a couple hours advance warning. So, it's a big ol' list =) If you mean most recently: Call of Cthulhu, Risus, Paranoia and Fly From Evil [in playtest] in the past few months. Not enough, though. Need more gamins' =(
ReplyDelete(Edit:) Those lists stack like matryoshka, so the big-ol list is in the neighborhood of 500, total, not 500+200+100.